He could’ve said “thanks for voting us in I’m not going to change anything whatsoever because you’re all ****ers” and people would claim he’s got off to a great start and they can see things improving already.
General Election 4th July ...
- Thread starter Smug in Boots
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
He could’ve said “thanks for voting us in I’m not going to change anything whatsoever because you’re all ****ers” and people would claim he’s got off to a great start and they can see things improving already.
I take things too personally sometimes mate.
Had a drop of Macallan last night and said my own goodbyes to the recent incarnation of the tories.
For full transparency this morning I have written an email to my new Labour MP. I have been trying to get some attention on the state of local grass community pitches and the outgoing tory MP was paying some attention. I was even polite to him and said congratulations
I tend to speak to people, on here, as I do with mates at the match which is often insulting and brutal ...
... the difference is that they can see my cheeky little face
It's only if I like people that I'll be banterish, I like to think I make meself clear if I don't like them.
To be fair, on the news, even people who would normally be opposed to him have said they were impressed.
He seems quite humble and eager to serve the country, that'll do for a start although there's clearly a huge mess to attack.
Last edited:
Aye agree, still think he’ll keep Kier “at it “ with his attention seeking loud rhetoric
I know Starmer has only been in the job for a couple of days but the fears of him being boring are looking like being true. I mean, there hasn't been a sniff of any extramarital affairs resulting in abortions or illegitimate offspring. He has not rode any zipwires wearing a Union Jack waistcoat to the best of my knowledge. Not once has he spoke in Latin or quoted Greek mythology. There has been no hiding in fridges, no giving Knighthoods to Russian criminals, or any handing million pound contracts to friends and family. As far as I am aware he hasn't told any lies and there have been no holidays in the Carribean on Labour Party donors yachts. It just isn't good enough
You might be right mate, but he can only repeat the same thing so many times imo.
His problem is that his 'solution' is actually against the law and that isn't likely to be changed.
Starting a battle with France, by having the Royal Navy dump migrants on their beaches would be idiotic ...
... only cooperation with Europe will persuade them to coordinate a solution that's better for everyone.
On the streets of Clacton, or in the pubs with England fans, he can get away with saying virtually anything.
He always makes a point of having a cheering crowd, flags and fireworks as a backdrop to his rhetoric ...
... he may well look and sound quite different in the House of Commons where he'll only have half a dozen supporters.
Just like Boris his jokes aren't actually funny without the 'canned laughter' brigade and I think he'll fall as flat as a wet fart.
Wonder how many times he is told off by the speaker or even asked to leave. You can't even accuse someone of lying even if it has been proven...he won't like that
He won't be getting his own way and think he's in for a shock.
On the contrary, a total PR system would have seen the 650 seats allocated in the following way (yes I'm a boring twat who has worked this out):
Labour - 220
Tory - 155
Reform - 94
Lib Dem - 80
Green - 42
SNP - 16
Independents - 14
Sinn Fein - 5
Workers Party - 5
Plaid Cymru - 5
Democratic Unionist - 4
Alliance - 3
Ulster Unionist - 2
Scottish Greens - 2
SDL -1
TUV - 1
Speaker - 1
It looks bad on the face of it, with Reform 3rd, but the only viable government is a coalition between Labour, Lib Dem and Greens. We'd end up with a very progressive centre-left government.
I know that Reform are shouting loudest for a change to the system, but it would essentially ensure that they don't ever get in power. Even in 1983 (Thatcher's landslide 2nd term), Labour and Liberals would have won too many seats to stop Thatcher having a majority. It would have either been Tory (275 seats) being pulled back to the centre in a coalition with Liberals (165 seats) or the Libs would have worked with Labour (179 seats) to form a government. There were no alternative options.
I guess the downside of that is that the balance of power will always be held by the 3rd/4th/5th most popular party (Green this year and the Liberals in 83) but it would likely ensure more centrist or slightly left leaning governments and be fairly consistent.
Hopefully see some change sooner rather than later seems like it’s been doom and gloom for years! At this point even opening the news one morning to see “Millions of UK citizens are eligible for £1k today” and actually being eligible for it just once would do
One of two things will happen imo.
He'll deliberately act up, so he's reprimanded by the Speaker and harrumphed by the benches, to try to make it look like he's being victimised and silenced by dark forces which will feed his supporters ...
... or he'll realise his act doesn't transfer from the stage to the House of Commons.
As he's never been there before I think it'll be the latter and he'll be 'busy elsewhere' most of the time.
I see him as being more concerned with himself, than the people of Clacton, and he'll just enjoy calling himself an MP.
Hopefully see some change sooner rather than later seems like it’s been doom and gloom for years! At this point even opening the news one morning to see “Millions of UK citizens are eligible for £1k today” and actually being eligible for it just once would do
Not far wrong there tbf.
Even diehard Tories don't seem to be shedding tears seeing the likes of Rees Mogg, Truss, Rees Mogg, Shapps, Rees Mogg, etc, booted out.
It's like when you leave a job then realise you didn't like the majority of people you worked with ...
... and will never see them again if you can help it
That is then another good argument against PR. To maintain balance, you need oscillation around the centre point, and that means centre right and centre left governments taking their turn in power. It also exacerbates the unfairness that PR would bring to rural communities who are more likely to vote Tory. Not only do these communities not get to vote for their own representative in parliament, they won't ever see a government that reflects their voting choices.
While it might be argued that FPTP favours the right, a system that just reverses that bias isn't the answer either.
I think PR does oscillate around the centre point on the basis that Labour and Tories are going to be dragged closer to the centre by those they need to work with.
If you make the assumption that there would be 5 main parties with a chance of power within a coalition and from left to right I'd say they are:
Green, Labour, Lib Dem, Tory, Reform.
Essentially the key component of a coalition is still going to be Labour/Tory, but they would likely have a partner on either wing of them to keep them in check. What it probably does though is allow unscrupulous people on the extremes to hold a government to ransom.
I'm not arguing in it's favour by the way, just putting out the case for it. I've not seen a perfect system so we'd just be swapping out one set of problems for another.
You must log in or register to see images
You must log in or register to see images
Sorry Smug mate, but that simply isn't true.
The narrowest part of the Channel, the Dover Strait, is 21 miles and consists of British and French territorial waters. In other parts of the Channel, international waters separate UK and French territorial waters.
You must log in or register to see images
Yeah, to be honest I did read a Cambridge University article a week or two back that used case studies to suggest that PR probably would be more balanced in those terms. I'm still not keen due to the reasons I mentioned about rural communities and people electing someone to represent them. I do think that there needs to be some sort of change, but I'd rather it wasn't PR.
Yeah this is where it starts to get technical and you're right, I'm wrong, regarding International Waters in the Channel ...
... I was being a bit lazy tbh.
I think the widest point of the official Channel is about 130 miles off St Malo to our mainland where there are International Waters.
What I'm talking about is the small boat route and there are no international waters there.
Under Maritime Law our Royal Navy can't just patrol French waters but can have a flotilla in our own waters. Therefore we can only intervene when the small boats enter our waters by which time they're our problem and, again under international laws, we're obliged to assist anyone in peril. (I know this from bitter experience.)
People often refer to Australian, Italian, etc, 'pushback' schemes but the circumstances are quite different.
The fact remains that, without the cooperation of the French, Farage's plan couldn't work.
"Gérald Darmanin, the French interior minister, has stated that France would not accept any practice that breaches the law of the sea. Indeed, implementing a blanket “turn back boats” policy would be to break international law."
